Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Ross Douthat's Gay Marriage Moment of Truth: It's Embarrassing to be a Bigot

Posted by Lindsay Beyerstein, Majikthise at 11:30 AM on October 23, 2009.


The "crunchy conservative" admits he has no good reason for his position.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Lindsay Beyerstein in your
mailbox!

 

Self-styled social conservative columnist Ross Douthat admits that he's uncomfortable discussing gay marriage in public because he opposes it for no good reason:

The question came from Christopher Glazek, a fact-checker at The New Yorker, who wanted to know whether Mr. Douthat and Mr. Salam believed that former RNC chairman Ken Mehlman, who has apologized on behalf of his party for the Southern Strategy, should also apologize for the Republican party's gay politics.

At first Mr. Douthat seemed unable to get a sentence out without interrupting himself and starting over. Then he explained: "I am someone opposed to gay marriage who is deeply uncomfortable arguing the issue in public."

Mr. Douthat indicated that he opposes gay marriage because of his religious beliefs, but that he does not like debating the issue in those terms. At one point he said that, sometimes, he feels like he should either change his mind, or simply resolve never to address the question in public. [NY Obs]

 

It's understandable that Douthat doesn't like debating the issue in terms of his religious beliefs. Because he always loses to the opponent who says: "Who cares about your religion, Ross? We're talking about the criteria for civil marriage, here."

Ross said he doesn't even bother with the standard secular argument against gay marriage because nobody ever takes takes it seriously:

He added: "The secular arguments against gay marriage, when they aren't just based on bigotry or custom, tend to be abstract in ways that don't find purchase in American political discourse. I say, ‘Institutional support for reproduction,' you say, ‘I love my boyfriend and I want to marry him.' Who wins that debate? You win that debate." [NY Obs]

Ross says the notion doesn't "get traction" because it's too "abstract." Actually, nobody takes this argument seriously because any undergraduate can debunk it with concrete counterexamples from everyday life. Even Ross thinks that sterile opposite-sex couples should be allowed to get married and I'm sure he's aware that some same-sex couples raise children.

It's understandable that Ross is uncomfortable talking about gay marriage in public. He wants the state to impose his religion on other people, but he doesn't want to look like a theocrat in front of the liberal cultural elite.

Digg!

Lindsay Beyerstein a New York writer blogging at Majikthise.


Mom Lets Cops Taze 10 Year-Old Daughter Who Refused to Take a Shower
We are very close to tasering infants for crying.
November 20, 2009.
Honduras Coup Regime: 'Break-Through Accord' Was Just a PR Ploy ... Zelaya Won't Return
An adviser to "interim president" Roberto Micheletti says just agreeing was enough to gain international recognition of the upcoming elections.
November 2, 2009.
Pelosi Steps Up as Champion of the Public Option
A Congressional Budget Office report suggesting that a robust public option would actually cut the deficit seems to have lit a fire under Speaker Pelosi.
October 21, 2009.
Whistleblower on Afghani Election: One in Three Votes for Karzai Were Fraudulent
'Spreading democracy' continues to be easier said than done.
October 8, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Tools: [Post a new comment] [Login] [Signup] View:
Well...
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Oct 23, 2009 11:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Since not being able to marry like everyone else hurts homosexuals and makes them second class citizens.... maybe its about time you give it up and just accept that gay marriage is not a problem for anyone but folks like you.. who have no reason to oppose it... because your only real reason IS bigotry.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Well... Posted by: koolwoman
I smell...
Posted by: hurricane hugo on Oct 23, 2009 12:47 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
another Republican closet case.

#@!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

simplicity... a fleeting virtue in politics
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford on Oct 23, 2009 6:49 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Two people want to get married. Go for it.
Man + woman, man + man, woman + woman, whatever.

These people know full well that the only reason they have to oppose gay marriage is their own personal religious beliefs. NOTHING else.

That RIGHT THERE states that THEY are FORCING THEIR RELIGION on other people, by not letting other people get married.

Marriage isn't some sort of "family institution" either. My wife and I NEVER plan to have kids. I'm getting a vasectomy as soon as possible. Meanwhile, yes. LOTS of gays adopt kids. Which is more than can be said for stupid, selfish American couples who want their own kids, instead of relieving the burdens of a poor, orphaned child.

Lots of kids WAIT for good homes. While others in this country are just born into privilege and sloth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bible-based argument is hypocritical
Posted by: grailsnail on Oct 26, 2009 1:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Even the Bible-based argument is flawed, because Jesus said this: when a man divorces a woman, except for adultery, he causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries her is an adulterer.

This means it should be illegal, according to the Biblical argument, for women to remarry after being divorced. She's an adulteress either way, and her marriage is invalid!

Wait until the gay rights movement gets ahold of this argument and pickets churches and political candidates that recognize these "adulterous marriages". It will be awesome.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]